Saturday, July 16, 2011

EU recognition for the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster

His Grace has long said that an inevitable consequence of equality and human rights legislation combined with religious relativism would be the state recognition of every cult, sect and frivolous faith under the sun. After all, why should a carpenter who rises from the dead be any more credible than an illiterate orphan merchant who claimed an angel dictated a book to him; a group of sword-carrying, turban-clad gentlemen who treat a book like a living guru; or a man who walks around with an elephant’s head upon his shoulders? Hitherto, in the UK, the focus has been on the Church of the Jedi, but they have systematically failed to bring their many incidences of discrimination to the courts.

In other parts of the EU, things are moving a little faster. Austria has formally recognised the colander as legitimate religious headwear for the Pastafarian. And since it concerns the EU drivers’ licence, it is effectively an EU affirmation of Pastafarian belief.

Well, why not? If hijabs, turbans and kippas are permitted, why not a colander? It is, arguably, of far greater significance to the Pastafarian as it is actually used to strain the holy pasta. As a religious accessory, it is therefore of far more importance than the symbolic hijab or kirpan.

Niko Alm belongs to the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Its adherents call themselves Pastafarians, whose ‘only dogma...is the rejection of dogma’.

Unfortunately, like all postmodern, relativist creeds, it is intrinsically contradictory and ultimately self-negating, for the insistence on the wearing of a colander confutes and nullifies their only dogma.

The fact that the EU drivers’ licence in Austria permits the wearing of a colander inevitably means that UK licences must also now permit this. There may be a little persecution in the compulsory mental assessment of the fitness to drive, but, ultimately, that which the EU permits in one member state will be permitted in another. Pastafarianism has just become an officially recognised religion because, while many international and regional human rights instruments guarantee rights related to freedom of religion or belief, none attempts to define the term ‘religion’. The absence of a definition is not peculiar to international human rights conventions; most national constitutions also include clauses on freedom of religion without defining it. Thus we are presented, on the one hand, with important provisions guaranteeing fundamental rights pertaining to religion, but on the other hand the term itself is left undefined. Of course, the absence of a definition of a critical term does not differentiate religion from most other rights identified in human rights instruments and constitutions. However, because religion is much more complex than other guaranteed rights, the difficulty of understanding what is and is not protected is significantly greater.

Theologians and philosophers may have the luxury of imprecision, but lawyers and judges do not.

It would greatly assist if the judiciary would establish a little case-law clarity on what now constitutes a legitimate religion in the UK, who is judged to be a messenger of God, what doctrine may be preached, what creed followed, and what liberties may be denied.

If they cannot and do not, we run the risk of the emergence of militant Pastafarianism and the ascent of the Pastarists. They will doubtless be riddled with denominational division: Rotini, Vermicelli, Linguini, Fusilli, etc., etc.

65 Comments:

What about the 'boiled again' Pastafarians, who used dried pasta and boil it, but who are at odds with the 'fresh' Pastafarians, who decree only freshly made pasta is acceptable to be used as holy pasta? I can see a schism already....

I wonder if we can gain any experience from the USA, whose constitution bans an established state religion. That country has lots of sects, churches, cults, gurus and whatnot and I wonder if there are any lessons or comments from our friends over the pond on this?

"why should a carpenter who rises from the dead be any more credible than an illiterate orphan merchant who claimed an angel dictated a book to him; a group of sword-carrying, turban-clad gentlemen who treat a book like a living guru; or a man who walks around with an elephant’s head upon his shoulders?"

Good question. I think the Pastafarians would want you to keep asking it.

We Anapastists have always been insulted and persecuted by the mainstream 'institutional' pastafarians. Only the Tagliatellians have shown much sympathy or understanding, but that didn't last. In any case, they're all chilliasts and have some sort of beef with the rest of the pastafarians. I'm cheesed off with the lot of them. They have a great deal of sauce, and sun-dry misunderstandings.

But we are the only ones who understand the need for mature, genuine pasta to be fully immersed in water.

After all, why should a carpenter who rises from the dead be any more credible than an illiterate orphan merchant who claimed an angel dictated a book to him; a group of sword-carrying, turban-clad gentlemen who treat a book like a living guru; or a man who walks around with an elephant’s head upon his shoulders?

Why indeed. All are figments of mankind’s vivid imagination.

It would greatly assist if the judiciary would establish a little case-law clarity on what now constitutes a legitimate religion in the UK, who is judged to be a messenger of God, what doctrine may be preached, what creed followed, and what liberties may be denied.

You cannot be serious! If you had to PROVE the veracity of your religions fantastical claims you would be laughed out of court. Your best is to continue the argument that you cannot disprove the existence of God, almost as nonsensical but not quite. I cannot disprove the existence of Santa but I guess you will agree that it is unlikely.

It can be anticipated that, under the canons of scientific research, a "faith group" cannot have the status of "religious" unless it has continued after at least one schism or sectarian divide.

"...requirement for any religion to be able to demonstrate martyrs in its history." (10:02)_

"martyrs" as a test would be problematic. First, that word is being misapplied to its opposite (viz, murderers persecuting in the name of a certain doctrine currently deemed to be a religion), and secondly, because of an inappropriate extension to atheists or opponents of religious doctrine, such as Giordano Bruno.

Another possible test, at least for a Pauline religion: being seen as a joke or foolishness.

But some further test would be needed, to separate the Comedy from the Farces.

It's no joke that seeks to expose the irrationality of making concessions to one superstitious belief over another as Cranmer perfectly outlines in the OP. The only Joke - is that we are still subject to diktats of the monolith that is the EU - and pay through the nose for the privilege.

Sorry Len the concept of truth or THE TRUTH is flawed. What you claim is truth is simply anything you want it to be. The nearest you can get to “truth” is a logically coherent concept that explains any given phenomena, you will have to do with that I’m afraid.

In a forensic environment, Pilate is shown as having refused the false witness of the accusers; upon examination he finds the accused to be without fault; he has some inkling of the truth about Jesus as "King of the Jews" but (like the disciples themselves at that stage) cannot grasp the fullness of the evidence of the real presence. The accused is shown to have forgiven them who knew not what they did.

The point at issue is the equivalent right to wear the colander in an official photo as being contiguous with the requirements of his 'religious' belief. The only difference between his 'religion' and any other, is that it is only a couple of years old. I don't think he intends to use the colander as a crash helmet.

For once this is not an attempt to circumvent road safety requirements

In the article I read, it stated that the reason he wasn't refused the license was because photos are accepted as long as the face is visible. Thus he could wear anything on the top of his head and religion wouldn't come into it. In reality he's done nothing but look like a mental patient and extend the issuing time (he had to prove he was mentally fit to drive). Storm in a teacup; religion never came into it.

No doubt poured from Russell's invisible but orbiting Tea-pot. Of course it's about religion. You could not submit a photo wearing Stetson any more than would a non muslim woman wearing a Hermes scarf

"Today I was able to get my new driving licence, and in it you can clearly see that I'm wearing a colander on my head to demonstrate my allegiance to the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster," Mr Alm wrote in his blog.

The problem with the Pastafarians is that they are devient cult of the only Holy universal Carbohydrate Church, headed by the Holy Mother of Gin & Tonic .

It is not only pasta which is holy, but also Rice, Potateos & bread. The Carbohydrate Bible is a collection of works, some 200 books in all by many different authors, in the divine language of English.

The most famous characters in the supreme revelation are Stein, Lawson and Rhodes ,Delia, Worral Thompson and Floyd.

The are also the debatable duetro-cannonical books, which deal mostly with seaweed, grass and chicken, but these are not considered to be the true word of scripture as far as the Reformed Carbohydrate and boiled again Carbs are concerned.

"Pastafarianism" is not new. Mockery and unbelief are as old as man. This is a somewhat novel form of mockery but it's not particularly clever. It's just juvenile, and says much more about the issuing authority than the man with a cooking utensil on his head.

When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things. For then I saw in a mist dimly, but now face to void; then I knew in part, but now I know fully that there is none to know me. But now Hedonism, Nihilism, Despair, abide these three; but the greatest of these is Despair.

Therefore truth is anything you or I want it to be (a bit silly isn’t it)?

Carl said

When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish thingsEpistle of the Apostle Friedrich to the Europeans, Chapter 13

Poor confused Friedrich. He didn’t do away with such childish things but continued to believe in them. So when he became a man he continued to think like a child and believe in the myths that he was fed as a child.

I assume Graham Davies is an atheist, so one less primitve savage on the planet earth, but still 6 billion others. If you had all focused on science in the past, you might be colonising your first star system by now. But as it happens you shall be the ruled, rather that the rulers!

OK, so I am an American, and we are as a rule somewhat (shall we say) historically challenged on the subject of European royalty. We know:

a. King George III, for obvious reasons.

b. Louis XVI for getting his head cut off.

c. Richard the Lion-Hearted because he was restored to the throne by Robin Hood.

d. Elizabeth I for appearing in a whole bunch of cool Errol Flynn Movies, and sinking the Spanish Armada.

e. Henry VIII for the whole thing with Rome, and the wives, and the song by Herman's Hermits.

f. King Arthur because of 'Monty Python and the Holy Grail.'

That's about it. I personally know about Russian royalty because I find Russian history fascinating, but that doesn't help me with this guy Henry XVIII. It would be cheating to use the internet (and in any case my somewhat more royalty-aware wife has already failed to produce a satisfactory answer via that avenue of investigation.) Help a poor American out, here.

There are two types of blind in the World, those who are born blind but would dearly love to see a beautiful sunset, for them their is hope. Hope that he who opens blind eyes, both spiritual & physical, & Those who refuse to look, turn their backs shut & cover their eyes & mock & laugh, saying "A sunset? I can't see it, so it doesn't exist!".John 9. Read it & weep. Sad, lost & pitiful ones. Turn & pray that the Lord will heal you while their is still time.

Reaching underneath my well-thumbed copy of "Saints of the Anglican Calendar", to my much-less-well-thumbed copy of "The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster", I find no mention in the latter (or, frankly, the former) of the wearing of colanders.

Pastafarianism is not, and does not pretend to be, a religion. It was invented purely for the purpose, under the US 1st Amendment, of making it clear that "Intelligent Design" (sic[k]) Creationists were a bunch of pathetic morons who shouldn't be allowed near the Kansas State, or any other, science curriculum. Or, frankly, the Religious Studies curriculum.

Unless there was a focus on "Comparative Religious Idiocies of the late 20th and early 21st Centuries."

Stop taking pointless offence - the guy is a twit and the Austrian government are idiots.

Unless you are an "intelligent design" believer or a "Young Earth Creationist". In which case, just to ensure you feel properly offended, can I point out that you are so wholly ignorant, even the Catholic Church has declared you are wrong?

Sorry Len the concept of truth or THE TRUTH is flawed. What you claim is truth is simply anything you want it to be. The nearest you can get to “truth” is a logically coherent concept that explains any given phenomena, you will have to do with that I’m afraid."

I'd just like to suggest to Mr Davies, that the evidence of the resurrection, when examined carefully and in legalistic - ie: "forensic" terms - would stand up in court. The problem to many of today's atheists have is that they do not understand the culture or the period in which these events occured and so put a 'western modernist' interpretation on everything.

As for the Pastafarians, I suspect they, like the current crop of atheists, will, as the Book of Sirach (Ecclesiasticus in the KJV Apocrypha) Chapter 44 says, be among those "who have no memorial. They are vanished away as if they had never been, and their children after them."

The ANGLICAN AND Catholic Church is a FALSE religion. Catholics have been fabricating new doctrines for centuries. Notice HOW ANGLICAN children and adults worship the Pope and the ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY ! It is idolatry!

Those who criticise the gospel of Jesus Christ and the resurrection as being fantasy are basing their logic on ....what?.... merely their own opinions. Now how many of you Atheists have studied Bible prophesy?. Which incidentally is how God verifies His Word.I am willing to bet... none.... not at any depth anyway otherwise you would know the truth.So Atheists your claims are based on ignorance of the facts, you are entitled to your opinion but let it be known that your opinion is based on ignorance not truth.

Have you studied all the details of Hinduism? I went through 18 months of attempted indoctrination by the Jehovah Witnesses out of interest in an attempt to understand them. What about you? Or are you ignorant, being happy with what you have so far?

But anyway, Mr Harold Camping Mark II, give us one of your biblical prophesies here and let's have a look at it. You have me intrigued now. But please, if it's like (say) Isaiah predicting Jesus then the answer to that is laughably simple. I wouldn't even bother joking with Mr Creek about that.

Harold Camping was the American guy who thought he had unlocked a prophesy about the world ending this year.

The prophesies to which you refer are like ones in the Isaiah, aren't they? Have you ever wondered why the later writers made such an effort to set out certain things, like lineages? Could it be, do you think, that they knew what was in Isaiah when they wrote them? Wild and random thought, I know.

As you no doubt know, the books compiled into the bible are not just recorded history. They're deliberate narratives. :O

I'm still struggling to come to terms with the revelation that I worship the Most Reverend and Right Honourable the Lord Archbishop Beardy of Druidness.

And I can't really get my head around it at all.

The poor divinity-in-theory didn't get even a single mention in today's service - and the only bishop who did was the diocesan one, and that only in the prayers. So if I do worship him, I don't do it very well at all. Hmm.

But no, I think I've got it. "True Christian" is a moron or a troll. Quite probably both. That'll save me some musing time for important matters.

Danjo,I don`t take one prophesy and leave it at that!.This would be like taking a single sentence from a book and saying "yes I have read that".Bible prophesy is given thousands of yrs in advance and very involved and very precise ,giving names, dates, and times, for events.

In Principio Erat Verbum: "In the Beginning was the Word." This approach to Judaeo-Christianity informs the thesis that all knowledge is linguistic.

Thus we may paraphrase the explanatory narrative: The Word created material life out of nothing. It is a process which our inferior perception may interpret as a kind of organization (for purposes beyond our ken).

The narrative indicates that some life got a bit above itself and Fell (Hubris). Therefrom, it seems, the Word - which, as Life, infuses all His Creation - split some knowledge into words. These units of thought and motive enable communication between materialized individuals; however, being of the Creator, words also initiate our quest to return to the Whole Truth of which they are a rightly a part.

Our patterns of organization categorize us. We explain our identity in such words as: species, race, tribe, family, individual. Each unit survives by some dominion over the material environment, and so we always used charts like family trees to track narratives of origin and progress. Any idiot knows that we initially transmitted that knowledge orally--it was guarded and developed by priests and poets like our own Druids and Scops.

The Israelites were among the first people to set their repository of wisdom into writing, thus making visible for their descendants the narrative that was invisible. We later wove their manifestly invaluable knowledge and techniques into our own.***************A load of franco-german filosofers have nowadays appropriated the educational aspect of word transmission. They rip up the fabric of our identity. They seek to control inconveniently successful groups by asserting the enviable kind of monopoly enjoyed by ... e.g Druids and Christians.

Our replacement priest-poet-rulers plagiarize madly, pretending that their narrative is neu - but even that concept is ancient Indo-European.

Biblical and historical record has, furthermore, preserved the knowledge of their kind, and so we recognise their tactics. Even the claim that "Winners write History" betrays the blindness with which they follow the stereotype while revealing their serpentine motives and lies. In fine - it doesn't take a prophet to see why their version of the story is dying; though Gollum still lusts after his Precious.

There is only one Perpetual Winner, though; whom someone above analogises as the Sieve. So let the pestifaracious Pastafarians join their grass-sniffing soulmates by the Gates of Vienna; for He alone wields the metaphorical Colander and provides every form of energy--

non mouse said... In Principio Erat Verbum: "In the Beginning was the Word." This approach to Judaeo-Christianity informs the thesis that all knowledge is linguistic....He Is: the Word, Logos.

Agreed.

And can broadly agree the rest, but not all of the French or German philosophers were all bad. Perhaps "franco-german filosofers" denotes something like "sophists", and not all are French or German, and some are neither?

The biggest, most ludicrous fantasy - but one - is the idea that everything that there is came from nothing by undirected accident(s) and chance (it's much, much more likely that my cat created everything (or my pasta, for that matter)). THE biggest and most ludicrous fantasy is that, IF by some amazing chance the second fantasy is correct, there's any point in anything except immediate suicide. The most bogus, deceptional, and illusiory pseudo-religion is Darwimism/evolutionism (which even some atheist/ materialist scientists are now coming out against, apparently).

No point arguing with those who turn their backs & deny what they don't like. They are simply suffering from self inflicted blindness, & when the blind lead the blind....... I mean, would you trust your life to a blind pilot, no matter how much he assured you he could see better than you can?.Happy holidays!.

His Grace said that "If hijabs, turbans and kippas are permitted, why not a colander? It is, arguably, of far greater significance to the Pastafarian as it is actually used to strain the holy pasta."

I am stung to the core. His Grace cavalierly conflates my kippa with all the other humdrum religious acoutrements, leeching it of its profound uniqueness, ignoring its obvious utilitarian values.

While a colander is limited to being just a colander, my kippas can not only hold liquids and serve as compote bowls, but the loosely knit versions become top-notch coffee filters, and of course the leather versions can be custom modified with a hole punch to serve as colanders as well and for specific products to boot. A kirpan can serve as a weapon, true, but some of my leather kippas are so stiff, they become deadly shurikens with unpredictable and hard to block flight patterns. Should I ever wish to rob a bank, I can clip a kippa to my glasses to cover my well-endowed and most identifiable facial feature.

Other applications include frisbees, emergency brassieres, gaskets, headlight covers, semaphores and so on. Limitless uses for the home, school or office.

The only thing a kippa can't be used for in Europe, as I discovered on my last trip, is as a kippa; placed on the head as per custom and manufacturer's recommendation, the kippa appears to enrage and dangerously agitate certain segments of the European population. On my next trip I think I'll wear a collander or, better still, a pair of ladies knickers on my head, thereby gaining full societal acceptance and official protection either as a cognitively differently-abled individual or as a member of the ever-expanding rainbow coalition.

About His Grace:

Archbishop Cranmer takes as his inspiration the words of Sir Humphrey Appleby: ‘It’s interesting,’ he observes, ‘that nowadays politicians want to talk about moral issues, and bishops want to talk politics.’ It is the fusion of the two in public life, and the necessity for a wider understanding of their complex symbiosis, which leads His Grace to write on these very sensitive issues.

Cranmer's Law:

"It hath been found by experience that no matter how decent, intelligent or thoughtful the reasoning of a conservative may be, as an argument with a liberal is advanced, the probability of being accused of ‘bigotry’, ‘hatred’ or ‘intolerance’ approaches 1 (100%).”

Follow His Grace on

The cost of His Grace's conviction:

His Grace's bottom line:

Freedom of speech must be tolerated, and everyone living in the United Kingdom must accept that they may be insulted about their own beliefs, or indeed be offended, and that is something which they must simply endure, not least because some suffer fates far worse. Comments on articles are therefore unmoderated, but do not necessarily reflect the views of Cranmer. Comments that are off-topic, gratuitously offensive, libelous, or otherwise irritating, may be summarily deleted. However, the fact that particular comments remain on any thread does not constitute their endorsement by Cranmer; it may simply be that he considers them to be intelligent and erudite contributions to religio-political discourse...or not.

The Anglican Communion has no peculiar thought, practice, creed or confession of its own. It has only the Catholic Faith of the ancient Catholic Church, as preserved in the Catholic Creeds and maintained in the Catholic and Apostolic constitution of Christ's Church from the beginning.Dr Geoffrey Fisher, Archbishop of Canterbury, 1945-1961

British Conservatism's greatest:

The epithet of 'great' can be applied only to those who were defining leaders who successfully articulated and embodied the Conservatism of their age. They combined in their personal styles, priorities and policies, as Edmund Burke would say, 'a disposition to preserve' with an 'ability to improve'.

I am in politics because of the conflict between good and evil, and I believe that in the end good will triumph.Margaret Thatcher, Baroness Thatcher LG, OM, PC, FRS.(Prime Minister 1979-1990)

We have not overthrown the divine right of kings to fall down for the divine right of experts.Harold Macmillan, 1st Earl of Stockton, OM, PC.(Prime Minister 1957-1963)

Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.Sir Winston Churchill, KG, OM, CH, TD, FRS, PC (Can).(Prime Minister 1940-1945, 1951-1955)

I am not struck so much by the diversity of testimony as by the many-sidedness of truth.Stanley Baldwin, 1st Earl Baldwin of Bewdley, KG, PC.(Prime Minister 1923-1924, 1924-1929, 1935-1937)

If you believe the doctors, nothing is wholesome; if you believe the theologians, nothing is innocent; if you believe the military, nothing is safe.Robert Cecil, 3rd Marquess of Salisbury, KG, GCVO, PC.(Prime Minister 1885-1886, 1886-1892, 1895-1902)

I am a Conservative to preserve all that is good in our constitution, a Radical to remove all that is bad. I seek to preserve property and to respect order, and I equally decry the appeal to the passions of the many or the prejudices of the few.Benjamin Disraeli KG, PC, FRS, Earl of Beaconsfield.(Prime Minister 1868, 1874-1880)

Public opinion is a compound of folly, weakness, prejudice, wrong feeling, right feeling, obstinacy, and newspaper paragraphs.Sir Robert Peel, Bt.(Prime Minister 1834-1835, 1841-1846)

I consider the right of election as a public trust, granted not for the benefit of the individual, but for the public good.Robert Jenkinson, 2nd Earl of Liverpool.(Prime Minister 1812-1827)

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.The Rt Hon. William Pitt, the Younger.(Prime Minister 1783-1801, 1804-1806)